Search Results

Search found 2039 results on 82 pages for 'owner'.

Page 1/82 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• Messing with the Team

  - by Robert May

  Good Product Owners will help the team be the best that they can be.  Bad product owners will mess with the team and won’t care about the team.  If you’re a product owner, seek to do good and avoid bad behavior at all costs.  Remember, this is for YOUR benefit and you have much power given to you.  Use that power wisely. Scope Creep The product owner has several tools at his disposal to inject scope into an iteration.  First, the product owner can use defects to inject scope.  To do this, they’ll tell the team what functionality that they want to see in a feature.  Then, after the feature is developed, the Product Owner will decide that they don’t really like how the functionality behaves.  To change it, rather than creating a new story, they’ll add a defect.  The functionality is correct, as designed, but the Product Owner doesn’t like it.  By creating the defect, the Product Owner destroys the trust that the team has of the product owner.  They may not be able to count the story, because the Product Owner changed the story in the iteration, and the team then ends up looking like they have low velocity for something over which they have no control.  This is bad.  One way to deal with this is to add “Product Owner Time” to the iteration.  This will slow the velocity, but then the ScrumMaster can tell stake holders that this time is strictly in place to deal with bad behavior of the Product Owner. Another mechanism often used to inject Scope is the concept of directed development.  Outside of planning, stand-ups, or any other meeting, the Product Owner will take a developer aside and ask them to complete a task for them.  This is bad!  The team should be allocating all of their time to development.  If the Product Owner asks for a favor, then time that would normally be used for development will be used for a pet project of the Product Owner and the team will not get credit for this work.  Selfish product owners do this, and I typically see people who were “managers” do this behavior.  Authoritarian command and control development environments also see this happen.  The best thing that can happen is for the team member to report the issue to the ScrumMaster and the ScrumMaster to get very aggressive with management and the Product Owner to try and stop the behavior.  This may result in the ScrumMaster being fired, but if the behavior continues, Scrum is doomed.  This problem is especially bad in cases where the team member’s direct supervisor is the Product Owner.  I don’t recommend that the Product Owner or ScrumMaster have a direct report relationship with team members, since team members need the ability to say no.  To work around this issue, team members need to say no.  If that fails, team members need to add extra time to the iteration to deal with the scope creep injection and accept the lower velocity. As discussed above, another mechanism for injecting scope is by changing acceptance tests after the work is complete.  This is similar to adding defects to change scope and is bad.  To get around, add time for Product Owner uncertainty to the iteration and make sure that stakeholders are aware of the need to add this time because of the Product Owner. Refusing to Prioritize Refusing to prioritize causes chaos for the team.  From the team’s perspective, things that are not important will be worked on while things that the team knows are vital will be ignored.  A poor Product Owner will often pick the stories for the iteration on a whim.  This leads to the team working on many different aspects of the product and results in a lower velocity, since each iteration the team must switch context to the new area of development. The team will also experience confusion about priorities.  In one iteration, Feature X was the highest priority and had to be done.  Then, the following iteration, even though parts of Feature X still need to be completed, no stories to address them will be in the iteration.  However, three iterations later, Feature X will again become high priority. This will cause the team to not trust the Product Owner, and eventually, they’ll stop caring about the features they implement.  They won’t know what is important, so to insulate themselves from the ever changing chaos, they’ll become apathetic to all features.  Team members are some of the most creative people in a company.  By losing their engagement, the company is going to have a substandard product because the passion for the product won’t be in the team. Other signs that the Product Owner refuses to prioritize is that no one outside of the product owner will be consulted on priorities.  Additionally, the product, release, and iteration backlogs will be weak or non-existent. Dealing with this issue is not easy.  This really isn’t something the team can fix, short of taking over the role of Product Owner themselves.  An appeal to the stake holders might work, but only if the Product Owner isn’t a “manager” themselves.  The ScrumMaster needs to protect the team and do what they can to either get the Product Owner to prioritize or have the Product Owner replaced. Managing the Team A Product Owner that is also the “boss” of team members is a Scrum team that is waiting to fail.  If your boss tells you to do something, failing to do that something can cause you to be fired.  The team needs the ability to tell the Product Owner NO.  If the product owner introduces scope creep, the team has a responsibility to tell the Product Owner no.  If the Product Owner tries to get the team to commit to more than they can accomplish in an iteration, the team needs the ability to tell the Product Owner no. If the Product Owner is your boss and determines your pay increases, you’re probably not going to ever tell them no, and Scrum will likely fail.  The team can’t do much in this situation. Another aspect of “managing the team” that often happens is the Product Owner tries to tell the team how to develop the stories that are in the iteration.  This is one reason why I recommend that Product Owners are NOT technical people.  That way, the team can come up with the tasks that are needed to accomplish the stories and the Product Owner won’t know better.  If the Product Owner is technical, the ScrumMaster will need to take great care to protect the team from the ScrumMaster changing how the team thinks they need to implement the stories. Product Owners can also try to manage the team by their body language.  If the team says a task is going to take 6 hours to complete, and the Product Owner disagrees, they will use some kind of sour body language to indicate this disagreement.  In weak teams, this may cause the team to revise their estimate down, which will result in them taking longer than estimated and may result in them missing the iteration.  The ScrumMaster will need to make sure that the Product Owner doesn’t send such messages and that the team ignores them and estimates what they REALLY think it will take to complete the tasks.  Forcing the team to deal with such items in the retrospective can be helpful. Absenteeism The team is completely dependent upon the Product Owner to develop features for the customer.  The Product Owner IS the voice of the customer and without them, the team will lack direction.  Being the Product Owner is a full time job!  If the Product Owner cannot dedicate daily time with the team, a different product owner should be found. The Product Owner needs to attend every stand-up, planning meeting, showcase, and retrospective that the team has.  The team also must be able to have instant communication with the product owner.  They must not be required to schedule meetings to speak with their product owner.  The team must be the highest priority task that the Product Owner has. The best way to work around an absent Product Owner is to appoint a new Product Owner in the team.  This person will be responsible for making the decisions that the Product Owner should be making and to act as the liaison to the absent Product Owner.  If the delegate Product Owner doesn’t have authority to make decisions for the team, Scrum will fail.  If the Product Owner is absent, the ScrumMaster should seek to have that Product Owner replaced by someone who has the time and ability to be a real Product Owner. Making it Personal Too often Product Owners will become convinced that their ideas are the ones that matter and that anyone who disagrees is making a personal attack on them.  Remember that Product Owners will inherently be at odds with many people, simply because they have the need to prioritize.  Others will frequently question prioritization because they only see part of the picture that Product Owners face. Product Owners must have a thick skin and think egos.  If they don’t, they tend to make things personal, which causes them to become emotional and causes them to take actions that can destroy the trust that team members have in the Product Owner. If a Product Owner is making things person, the best thing that team members can do is reassure them that its not personal, but be firm about doing what is best for the Company and for the users.  The ScrumMaster should also spend significant time coaching the Product Owner on how to not react emotionally and how to accept criticism without becoming defensive. Conclusion I’m sure there are other ways that a Product Owner can mess with the team, but these are the most common that I’ve seen.  I would encourage all Product Owners to seek to be a good Product Owner.  If you find yourself behaving in any of the bad product owner ways, change your behavior today!  Your team will thank you. Remember, being Product Owner is very difficult!  Product Owner is one of the most difficult roles in Scrum.  However, it can also be one of the most rewarding roles in Scrum, since Product Owners literally see their ideas brought to life on the computer screen.  Product Owners need to be very patient, even in the face of criticism and need to be willing to make tough decisions on priority, but then not become offended when others disagree with those decisions.  Companies should spend the time needed to find the right product owners for their teams.  Doing so will only help the company to write better software. Technorati Tags: Scrum,Product Owner

  Read the article

• The Product Owner

  - by Robert May

  In a previous post, I outlined the rules of Scrum.  This post details one of those rules. Picking a most important part of Scrum is difficult.  All of the rules are required, but if there were one rule that is “more” required that every other rule, its having a good Product Owner.  Simply put, the Product Owner can make or break the project. Duties of the Product Owner A Product Owner has many duties and responsibilities.  I’ll talk about each of these duties in detail below. A Product Owner: Discovers and records stories for the backlog. Prioritizes stories in the Product Backlog, Release Backlog and Iteration Backlog. Determines Release dates and Iteration Dates. Develops story details and helps the team understand those details. Helps QA to develop acceptance tests. Interact with the Customer to make sure that the product is meeting the customer’s needs. Discovers and Records Stories for the Backlog When I do Scrum, I always use User Stories as the means for capturing functionality that’s required in the system.  Some people will use Use Cases, but the same rule applies.  The Product Owner has the ultimate responsibility for figuring out what functionality will be in the system.  Many different mechanisms for capturing this input can be used.  User interviews are great, but all sources should be considered, including talking with Customer Support types.  Often, they hear what users are struggling with the most and are a great source for stories that can make the application easier to use. Care should be taken when soliciting user stories from technical types such as programmers and the people that manage them.  They will almost always give stories that are very technical in nature and may not have a direct benefit for the end user.  Stories are about adding value to the company.  If the stories don’t have direct benefit to the end user, the Product Owner should question whether or not the story should be implemented.  In general, technical stories should be included as tasks in User Stories.  Technical stories are often needed, but the ultimate value to the user is in user based functionality, so technical stories should be considered nothing more than overhead in providing that user functionality. Until the iteration prior to development, stories should be nothing more than short, one line placeholders. An exercise called Story Planning can be used to brainstorm and come up with stories.  I’ll save the description of this activity for another blog post. For more information on User Stories, please read the book User Stories Applied by Mike Cohn. Prioritizes Stories in the Product Backlog, Release Backlog and Iteration Backlog Prioritization of stories is one of the most difficult tasks that a Product Owner must do.  A key concept of Scrum done right is the need to have the team working from a single set of prioritized stories.  If the team does not have a single set of prioritized stories, Scrum will likely fail at your organization.  The Product Owner is the ONLY person who has the responsibility to prioritize that list.  The Product Owner must be very diplomatic and sincerely listen to the people around him so that he can get the priorities correct. Just listening will still not yield the proper priorities.  Care must also be taken to ensure that Return on Investment is also considered.  Ultimately, determining which stories give the most value to the company for the least cost is the most important factor in determining priorities.  Product Owners should be willing to look at cold, hard numbers to determine the order for stories.  Even when many people want a feature, if that features is costly to develop, it may not have as high of a return on investment as features that are cheaper, but not as popular. The act of prioritization often causes conflict in an environment.  Customer Service thinks that feature X is the most important, because it will stop people from calling.  Operations thinks that feature Y is the most important, because it will stop servers from crashing.  Developers think that feature Z is most important because it will make writing software much easier for them.  All of these are useful goals, but the team can have only one list of items, and each item must have a priority that is different from all other stories.  The Product Owner will determine which feature gives the best return on investment and the other features will have to wait their turn, which means that someone will not have their top priority feature implemented first. A weak Product Owner will refuse to do prioritization.  I’ve heard from multiple Product Owners the following phrase, “Well, it’s all got to be done, so what does it matter what order we do it in?”  If your product owner is using this phrase, you need a new Product Owner.  Order is VERY important.  In Scrum, every release is potentially shippable.  If the wrong priority items are developed, then the value added in each release isn’t what it should be.  Additionally, the Product Owner with this mindset doesn’t understand Agile.  A product is NEVER finished, until the company has decided that it is no longer a going concern and they are no longer going to sell the product.  Therefore, prioritization isn’t an event, its something that continues every day.  The logical extension of the phrase “It’s all got to be done” is that you will never ship your product, since a product is never “done.”  Once stories have been prioritized, assigning them to the Release Backlog and the Iteration Backlog becomes relatively simple.  The top priority items are copied into the respective backlogs in order and the task is complete.  The team does have the right to shuffle things around a little in the iteration backlog.  For example, they may determine that working on story C with story A is appropriate because they’re related, even though story B is technically a higher priority than story C.  Or they may decide that story B is too big to complete in the time available after Story A has tasks created, so they’ll work on Story C since it’s smaller.  They can’t, however, go deep into the backlog to pick stories to implement.  The team and the Product Owner should work together to determine what’s best for the company. Prioritization is time consuming, but its one of the most important things a Product Owner does. Determines Release Dates and Iteration Dates Product owners are responsible for determining release dates for a product.  A common misconception that Product Owners have is that every “release” needs to correspond with an actual release to customers.  This is not the case.  In general, releases should be no more than 3 months long.  You  may decide to release the product to the customers, and many companies do release the product to customers, but it may also be an internal release. If a release date is too far away, developers will fall into the trap of not feeling a sense of urgency.  The date is far enough away that they don’t need to give the release their full attention.  Additionally, important tasks, such as performance tuning, regression testing, user documentation, and release preparation, will not happen regularly, making them much more difficult and time consuming to do.  The more frequently you do these tasks, the easier they are to accomplish. The Product Owner will be a key participant in determining whether or not a release should be sent out to the customers.  The determination should be made on whether or not the features contained in the release are valuable enough  and complete enough that the customers will see real value in the release.  Often, some features will take more than three months to get them to a state where they qualify for a release or need additional supporting features to be released.  The product owner has the right to make this determination. In addition to release dates, the Product Owner also will help determine iteration dates.  In general, an iteration length should be chosen and the team should follow that iteration length for an extended period of time.  If the iteration length is changed every iteration, you’re not doing Scrum.  Iteration lengths help the team and company get into a rhythm of developing quality software.  Iterations should be somewhere between 2 and 4 weeks in length.  Any shorter, and significant software will likely not be developed.  Any longer, and the team won’t feel urgency and planning will become very difficult. Iterations may not be extended during the iteration.  Companies where Scrum isn’t really followed will often use this as a strategy to complete all stories.  They don’t want to face the harsh reality of what their true performance is, and looking good is more important than seeking visibility and improving the process and team.  Companies like this typically don’t allow failure.  This is unhealthy.  Failure is part of life and unless we learn from it, we can’t improve.  I would much rather see a team push out stories to the next iteration and then have healthy discussions about why they failed rather than extend the iteration and not deal with the core problems. If iteration length varies, retrospectives become more difficult.  For example, evaluating the performance of the team’s estimation efforts becomes much more difficult if the iteration length varies.  Also, the team must have a velocity measurement.  If the iteration length varies, measuring velocity becomes impossible and upper management no longer will have the ability to evaluate the teams performance.  People external to the team will no longer have the ability to determine when key features are likely to be developed.  Variable iterations cause the entire company to fail and likely cause Scrum to fail at an organization. Develops Story Details and Helps the Team Understand Those Details A key concept in Scrum is that the stories are nothing more than a placeholder for a conversation.  Stories should be nothing more than short, one line statements about the functionality.  The team will then converse with the Product Owner about the details about that story.  The product owner needs to have a very good idea about what the details of the story are and needs to be able to help the team understand those details. Too often, we see this requirement as being translated into the need for comprehensive documentation about the story, including old fashioned requirements documentation.  The team should only develop the documentation that is required and should not develop documentation that is only created because their is a process to do so. In general, what we see that works best is the iteration before a team starts development work on a story, the Product Owner, with other appropriate business analysts, will develop the details of that story.  They’ll figure out what business rules are required, potentially make paper prototypes or other light weight mock-ups, and they seek to understand the story and what is implied.  Note that the time allowed for this task is deliberately short.  The Product Owner only has a single iteration to develop all of the stories for the next iteration. If more than one iteration is used, I’ve found that teams will end up with Big Design Up Front and traditional requirements documents.  This is a waste of time, since the team will need to then have discussions with the Product Owner to figure out what the requirements document says.  Instead of this, skip making the pretty pictures and detailing the nuances of the requirements and build only what is minimally needed by the team to do development.  If something comes up during development, you can address it at that time and figure out what you want to do.  The goal is to keep things as light weight as possible so that everyone can move as quickly as possible. Helps QA to Develop Acceptance Tests In Scrum, no story can be counted until it is accepted by QA.  Because of this, acceptance tests are very important to the team.  In general, acceptance tests need to be developed prior to the iteration or at the very beginning of the iteration so that the team can make sure that the tasks that they develop will fulfill the acceptance criteria. The Product Owner will help the team, including QA, understand what will make the story acceptable.  Note that the Product Owner needs to be careful about specifying that the feature will work “Perfectly” at the end of the iteration.  In general, features are developed a little bit at a time, so only the bit that is being developed should be considered as necessary for acceptance. A weak Product Owner will make statements like “Do it right the first time.”  Not only are these statements damaging to the team (like they would try to do it WRONG the first time . . .), they’re also ignoring the iterative nature of Scrum.  Additionally, a weak product owner will seek to add scope in the acceptance testing.  For example, they will refuse to determine acceptance at the beginning of the iteration, and then, after the team has planned and committed to the iteration, they will expand scope by defining acceptance.  This often causes the team to miss the iteration because scope that wasn’t planned on is included.  There are ways that the team can mitigate this problem.  For example, include extra “Product Owner” time to deal with the uncertainty that you know will be introduced by the Product Owner.  This will slow the perceived velocity of the team and is not ideal, since they’ll be doing more work than they get credit for. Interact with the Customer to Make Sure that the Product is Meeting the Customer’s Needs Once development is complete, what the team has worked on should be put in front of real live people to see if it meets the needs of the customer.  One of the great things about Agile is that if something doesn’t work, we can revisit it in a future iteration!  This frees up the team to make the best decision now and know that if that decision proves to be incorrect, the team can revisit it and change that decision. Features are about adding value to the customer, so if the customer doesn’t find them useful, then having the team make tweaks is valuable.  In general, most software will be 80 to 90 percent “right” after the initial round and only minor tweaks are required.  If proper coding standards are followed, these tweaks are usually minor and easy to accomplish.  Product Owners that are doing a good job will encourage real users to see and use the software, since they know that they are trying to add value to the customer. Poor product owners will think that they know the answers already, that their customers are silly and do stupid things and that they don’t need customer input.  If you have a product owner that is afraid to show the team’s work to real customers, you probably need a different product owner. Up Next, “Who Makes a Good Product Owner.” Followed by, “Messing with the Team.” Technorati Tags: Scrum,Product Owner

  Read the article

• MySQL (local) owner and permissions

  - by Steve Nelson

  I asked this question on the MySQL forums and got no answer. I asked on StackOverflow and received a recommendation to try on ServerFault. So here I am. I recently successfully installed the 64 bit version of mysql-5.5.8 on a MacBook Pro in the /usr/local directory. To address a completely unrelated software (RVM actually) , I chown-ed my /usr/local directory to $USER, Which made MySQL very unhappy. It complained specifically about the /usr/local/mysql/data directory, so I chown-ed that directory to _mysql:wheel. Everything appears to work again, but it made me wonder if I would have been better off changing the owner of the whole /usr/local/mysql directory, not just the data subdirectory. Since I neglected to make notes of what owner the default installation runs under before rashly changing the owner of the /usr/local directory, could someone tell me what owner and permissions the /usr/local/mysql directory is by default if you don't inadvertently screw it up? :-/ In terms of permissions I'm guessing rwxr-xr-x would be appropriate (that's what the data directory currently has and it appears to be working fine), but reinforcement for that hunch would be appreciated. Thanks for any help. Steve

  Read the article

• How to convince the agile product owner to change their mind? [closed]

  - by Joshiatto

  A friend of a friend ran into a situation recently in which the agile product owner specified features down to exactly what every single user click should look like. The problem is, the dev team has already figured out a way to accomplish the business value in fewer clicks (better UX), but in the past, questioning the product owner has led to career disaster. How do we convince the product owner to change their mind and go along with our recommendation? What can be done within the agile model to fix this situation and how do we accomplish it? On a bigger level: What can be done to make agile product owners better at their job to prevent this kind of thing from happening?

  Read the article

• How do you determine the OWNER of an Oracle Database

  - by Kwang Mark Eleven

  When you install an Oracle database in a Unix server, the Unix user id you use for the installation becomes the OWNER of the database. What is the most reliable and general way of determining in a shell script which Unix user is the owner of an Oracle installation? I mean, can you perform a grep on a file created by the installation to find this information or shall I resort to use the ls command on a specific file on a specific directory. If the name of the file to be checked is also variable, I would need to have a way of determining the name and path to the file. Thanks in advance for your time

  Read the article

• Can the customer be a SCRUM Product Owner in a project?

  - by Morten

  I just had a discussion with a colleague about the Product Owner role: In a project where a customer organization has brought in a sofware developing organization (supplier), can the role of Product Owner be successfully held by the customer organization, or should it always be held by the supplier? I always imagined, that the PO was the supplier organizations guy. The guy that ensured that the customer is happy, and continously fed with new and high-businessvalue functionality, but still an integral part of the developer organization. However, maybe I have viewed the PO role too much like the waterfall project manager. My colleague made me think: If the customer organization is mature and proffessional enough, why not let a person from their camp prioritize the backlog?? That would put the PO role much closer to the business, thus being (in theory) better to assess the business value of backlog items. To me, that is an intriguing thought. But what are the implication of such a setup??? I look forward to your input.

  Read the article

• Who Makes a Good Product Owner

  - by Robert May

  In general, the best product owners are those that care passionately about the customer of the product.  Note that I didn’t say about the product itself.  Actually, people that only care about the product, generally do not make good product owners.  Products only matter in relationship to their customers.  If a product doesn’t provide value to the customer, then the product has no value, no matter what a person might think of the product, and no matter what cool technologies exist inside of the product. A good product owner is also a good negotiator.  They recognize that many different priorities exist inside of a corporation, but that there can be only one list that developers work from.  A good product owner recognizes that its their job to help others around them prioritize (perhaps with a Product Council), but also understand that they alone have the final say about priorities and are willing to make the tough decisions required.  Deciding the priority between two perfectly valid stories is very difficult, especially when the stories are from two different departments! A good product owner is deeply interested in helping the team be successful.  They don’t seek to control the team, but instead seek to understand what the team can do and then work with the team to get the best product possible for the Customer.  A good product owner is never denigrating to team members, ever.  They recognize that such behavior would damage the trust that needs to be present between team members and product owners and will avoid it at all costs. In general, technical people (i.e. former or current developers) make poor product owners.  In their minds, they can’t separate implementation details from user functionality, so their stories end up sounding like implementation details.  For example, “The user enters their username on the password screen” is something that a technical product owner would write.  The proper wording for that story is “A user supplies the system with their credentials.”  Because technical people think different from the rest of the population, they are generally not a good fit. A good product owner is also a good writer.  Writing good stories demands good writing.  The art of persuasion, descriptiveness and just general good grammar are all required.  A good Product Owner must also be well spoken, since most of what will be conveyed will be conveyed with the spoken word, not just written word. A good product owner is a “People Person.”  They like talking to people and are very patient.  They don’t mind having questions repeated or fielding many questions, because they want to make sure that the ideas they’re conveying are properly understood so the customer gets the best product possible.  They are happy to answer any questions a team member may have and invite feedback and criticism of designs and stories, since they want a good product.  They really have little ego that gets in the way of building a great product. All of these qualities can be hard to find, but if you look close enough, you’ll find the right person in your organization.  Product owners can be found anywhere, not just in upper management.  Some of the best product owners are those that are very close to the customer.  In fact, check your customer support staff.  I’d bet that several great product owners are lurking there. Final note about what makes a good product owner.  You’re probably NOT going to find a good product owner in a manager, especially if they consider themselves a “Manager.”  Product owners don’t manage anything but the backlog, so be especially careful if the person you’re selecting for Product Owner is a manager. Up Next, “Messing with the Team.” Technorati Tags: Scrum,Product Owner

  Read the article

• Specify the owner in loadNibNamed:owner:options

  - by Siegfried

  I got an exception: this class is not key value coding-compliant for the key textField.' the exception occurs at this line: NSArray *nib = [[NSBundle mainBundle] loadNibNamed:@"cell" owner:?? options:nil]; What should be the owner if the class called cell.m owns this cell.xib?

  Read the article

• Owner Vs PArent and Taction shortcuts on Frames

  - by Fred

  I have a form with a panel. I create frames at runtime and display them on the panel by setting frame's parent property to the panel. When creating panels I do not set the owner property because i manage myself the lifetime of the frame. Until now i got no problem. Next I put an TActionList on the frame with some shortcuts on the actions. I found that my actions did not execute until I set the owner property of the frame to the panel. Can someone can explain me that ? I thought that owner property was just about wich component is responsible to free the children components, and not responsible to forward key events.

  Read the article

• What are the boundaries of the product owner in scrum?

  - by Saeed Neamati

  In another question, I asked about why I feel scrum turns active developers into passive developers, and it seems that the overall problem is not scrumy (related to scrum), and rather it's related to the bad implementation of scrum. So, here I have some questions about the scope of the responsibilities of PO (product owner) and the limitations he/she shouldn't pass. Should PO interfere the UI design, when there are designers at work in scrum team? (an example of this which has happened to us, is to replace checkboxes with a drop down list with two items, namely, yes and no; or to make some boxes larger, or to left-align some content instead of centering them on the page, or stuff like that). If yeah, to what extent? Colors? Layout? Should PO interfere in Design and architecture of coding? This hasn't happened to us yet, but I'm really curious about the boundaries. For example does PO has the right to change the platform (moving from ASP.NET MVC to PHP, or something like that), or choosing the count of servers (tier architecture), etc. Should PO interfere in validation mechanisms? For example, this field should be required, or we don't need to get this piece of information from user. Sometimes, analyzers and designers confirm that something can be handled behind the scene, like extracting the user profile info from another source, instead of asking for it in UI. How granular could/should PO get into the analysis and design? For example, a user story might be: "As a customer, I'd like to be able to buy new domains online". However, scrum team can implement this user story in a wizard of five steps, or in one single page. To which level PO should monitor, or govern, or supervise the technical analysis, design, and implementation? I asked these questions to judge whether our implementation is right or wrong?

  Read the article

• Plone site files owner

  - by user308333

  Hello everybody, I accidentally changed owner of all files on my plone site to plone, and I don't know how to fix this without reinstalling site, which won't be acceptable. I have backup version which keeps default owners but it's changed in the meanwhile on the dafault site. Maybe rsync can sync only ownerships between these copies??? Any idea would be precious. Cheers

  Read the article

• Database Owner Conundrum

  - by Johnm

  Have you ever restored a database from a production environment on Server A into a development environment on Server B and had some items, such as Service Broker, mysteriously cease functioning? You might want to consider reviewing the database owner property of the database. The Scenario Recently, I was developing some messaging functionality that utilized the Service Broker feature of SQL Server in a development environment. Within the instance of the development environment resided two databases: One was a restored version of a production database that we will call "RestoreDB". The second database was a brand new database that has yet to exist in the production environment that we will call "DevDB". The goal is to setup a communication path between RestoreDB and DevDB that will later be implemented into the production database. After implementing all of the Service Broker objects that are required to communicate within a database as well as between two databases on the same instance I found myself a bit confounded. My testing was showing that the communication was successful when it was occurring internally within DevDB; but the communication between RestoreDB and DevDB did not appear to be working. Profiler to the rescue After carefully reviewing my code for any misspellings, missing commas or any other minor items that might be a syntactical cause of failure, I decided to launch Profiler to aid in the troubleshooting. After simulating the cross database messaging, I noticed the following error appearing in Profiler: An exception occurred while enqueueing a message in the target queue. Error: 33009, State: 2. The database owner SID recorded in the master database differs from the database owner SID recorded in database '[Database Name Here]'. You should correct this situation by resetting the owner of database '[Database Name Here]' using the ALTER AUTHORIZATION statement. Now, this error message is a helpful one. Not only does it identify the issue in plain language, it also provides a potential solution. An execution of the following query that utilizes the catalog view sys.transmission_queue revealed the same error message for each communication attempt: SELECT     * FROM        sys.transmission_queue; Seeing the situation as a learning opportunity I dove a bit deeper. Reviewing the database properties  The owner of a specific database can be easily viewed by right-clicking the database in SQL Server Management Studio and selecting the "properties" option. The owner is listed on the "General" page of the properties screen. In my scenario, the database in the production server was created by Frank the DBA; therefore his server login appeared as the owner: "ServerName\Frank". While this is interesting information, it certainly doesn't tell me much in regard to the SID (security identifier) and its existence, or lack thereof, in the master database as the error suggested. I pulled together the following query to gather more interesting information: SELECT     a.name     , a.owner_sid     , b.sid     , b.name     , b.type_desc FROM        master.sys.databases a     LEFT OUTER JOIN master.sys.server_principals b         ON a.owner_sid = b.sid WHERE     a.name not in ('master','tempdb','model','msdb'); This query also helped identify how many other user databases in the instance were experiencing the same issue. In this scenario, I saw that there were no matching SIDs in server_principals to the owner SID for my database. What login should be used as the database owner instead of Frank's? The system stored procedure sp_helplogins will provide a list of the valid logins that can be used. Here is an example of its use, revealing all available logins: EXEC sp_helplogins;  Fixing a hole The error message stated that the recommended solution was to execute the ALTER AUTHORIZATION statement. The full statement for this scenario would appear as follows: ALTER AUTHORIZATION ON DATABASE:: [Database Name Here] TO [Login Name]; Another option is to execute the following statement using the sp_changedbowner system stored procedure; but please keep in mind that this stored procedure has been deprecated and will likely disappear in future versions of SQL Server: EXEC dbo.sp_changedbowner @loginname = [Login Name]; .And They Lived Happily Ever After Upon changing the database owner to an existing login and simulating the inner and cross database messaging the errors have ceased. More importantly, all messages sent through this feature now successfully complete their journey. I have added the ownership change to my restoration script for the development environment.

  Read the article

• SQL select all items of an owner from an item-to-owner table

  - by kdobrev

  I have a table bike_to_owner. I would like to select current items owned by a specific user. Table structure is CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `bike_to_owner` ( `bike_id` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL, `user_id` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL, `last_change_date` date NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`bike_id`,`user_id`,`last_change_date`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 COLLATE=utf8_unicode_ci; In the profile page of the user I would like to display all his/her current possessions. I wrote this statement: SELECT `bike_id`,`user_id`,max(last_change_date) FROM `bike_to_owner` WHERE `user_id` = 3 group by `last_change_date` but i'm not quite sure it works correctly in all cases. Can you please verify this is correct and if not suggest me something better. Using php/mysql. Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• How to change a Window Owner using its handle

  - by Ricky AH

  I want to make a .NET Form as a TopMost Form for another external App (not .NET related, pure Win32) so it stays above that Win32App, but not the rest of the apps running. I Have the handle of the Win32App (provided by the Win32App itself), and I've tried Win32 SetParent() function, via P/Invoke in C#, but then my .NET Form gets confined into the Win32App and that's not what I want.

  Read the article

• Using Scrum on small projects where Owner doesn't want to be involved

  - by Andrej Mohar

  Recently I've been reading and learning quite a lot about scrum and I like it a lot. However, I do have a couple of likely scenarios in my head to which I don't know the solution. So let's say that I might want to organize an agile team of (for instance) four web developers (one of them UI/UX designer). This team would operate on scrum principles. Initially we would probably be working on projects like landing pages for ordinary people's small businesses, like renting apartments, selling cookies... Such customers simply can't be set with Product Owner role (IMHO), because they usually expect to hire a company, give them the overall project goal with some details, and then expect the job to be done (including a lot of decision making) with as little of their involvement as possible (in their opinion, they have more important things to do). Let's say I'd like to engage myself in a developer/scrum master role (I know that even that is debatable, being a team member and scrum master at once), so I simply shouldn't take the role of the product owner as well. So as for my questions: If I'm my company's business owner, do I simply need to be a product owner as well (do these roles include each other)? Can I employ a sales person which might have the product owner role? Would it be better if it is an experienced developer instead of a sales person? Is this even a smart move? Lastly, is there another agile approach that might better suit my position? EDIT: Thank you everyone for good inputs. I added some comments, any aditional info will be greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• how to I change the owner of a folder on my server?

  - by Ashley Ward

  OK I'll be more specific - I have uploaded a bunch of folders via ftp. These now all have the the owner name of the account which I logged into FTP using. How do I change the owner to be the server name? and How do I find out what name the server is using? I'm pretty new to server permissions and the like, so please be gentle :) BTW, I'm using a linux server.

  Read the article

• Scrum: What if the Product Owner has tasks?

  - by Lauren J

  I have just started working with a team that has picked up some aspects of Scrum (two week timeboxing) but not others (the team does not currently agree to all estimates or to the number of points in a sprint, but I'll change this soon.) The product owner is also a technical resource (scientist) with some development background. Is it appropriate to have the product owner's tasks (which mostly involve research) mixed in with the team's tasks (some of which are research and some development).

  Read the article

• What are the risks of installing a "bad quality" package?

  - by ændrük

  When I try to install sonic-visualiser_1.9cc-1_amd64.deb via the Software Center the following warning message is displayed: The package is of bad quality The installation of a package which violates the quality standards isn't allowed. This could cause serious problems on your computer. Please contact the person or organisation who provided this package file and include the details beneath. Lintian check results for /home/ak/Downloads/sonic-visualiser_1.9cc-1_amd64.deb: Use of uninitialized value $ENV{"HOME"} in concatenation (.) or string at /usr/bin/lintian line 108. E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/ 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/bin/ 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/bin/sonic-visualiser 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/share/ 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/share/applications/ 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/share/applications/sonic-visualiser.desktop 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/share/doc/ 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/share/doc/sonic-visualiser/ 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/share/doc/sonic-visualiser/CHANGELOG 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/share/doc/sonic-visualiser/COPYING 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/share/doc/sonic-visualiser/README 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/share/mimelnk/ 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/share/mimelnk/application/ 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/share/mimelnk/application/x-sonicvisualiser-layer.desktop 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/share/mimelnk/application/x-sonicvisualiser.desktop 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/share/pixmaps/ 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/share/pixmaps/sv-icon-light.svg 1000/1000 E: sonic-visualiser: wrong-file-owner-uid-or-gid usr/share/pixmaps/sv-icon.svg 1000/1000 I understand that this means the package doesn't meet Debian policy and I know how to override the warning and install the package anyway. What are the risks of doing so?

  Read the article

• Set default owner/user

  - by Daniel Hollands

  I'm a web developer, and so have set-up an old machine in the office as an Ubuntu Server, for the purposes of testing websites. I've set-up LAMP and have created a /var/www folder, from which all my local sites are served. The issue is that of user permissions, i.e. any files that I copy into that folder (from my Windows machine via the network) automatically take on me (daniel) as their owner. The problem is that I want www-data to become the owner. I did some research and saw that it should be possible to use setuid (and setgid) to automatically set www-data as the owner of all files put into /var/www automatically, so far I've not had any luck making it work. Can someone help please? Thank you UPDATE: Would this do what I want it to do? Default file permissions for php user www-data UPDATE 2: I've kinda fixed my issue by changing my samba settings. Using Webmin, I was able to go in and change the default settings (as seen here: http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/521/captureon.png/)

  Read the article

• [WM6] Owner of a component. What exactly is this for?

  - by kornelijepetak

  I am developing an app for Windows Mobile 6 and there is a CameraCaptureDialog class that enables me to call a camera app from my own application. The class has an Owner property that most examples on the internet set to "this". cam.Owner = this; What exactly does this do? I've seen a similar scenario with Windows Forms components/controls by setting the Parent control. In that case I guess it's used only for layout algorithms, but other than that, is there any useful purpose? I don't see how setting an owner of the CameraCaptureDialog can (and actually does not) make any difference (at least not a visible one). Any insight would be appreciated.

  Read the article

• php change uploaded file owner

  - by shantanu

  I installed php5 , mysql and apache2 without any error. Everything is working fine. apache2's Root directory is /var/www (permission is 775). Problem is when i upload a file using php code it change the owner of uploaded file (as root). So i can not read this file from another code without changing owner of file manually. Is there is anyway to solve this problem? Should i add user to php group (how)? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• Nobody owner (99 99) in FTP caused by php functions !

  - by hacen

  I have a script (Joomla) that creates files and directories on the server. The problem is that it creates them under owner 99 99 (nobody) and after I can't delete or modify them by FTP without the help of the server admin. I think that is move_uploaded_file function of php. Is there any solution of this problem by the WHM or by the server admin? Can I modify the default owner in ftp?

  Read the article

• Subsonic - How to use SQL Schema / Owner name as part of the namespace?

  - by CResults

  Hi there, I've just started using Subsonic 2.2 and so far very impressed - think it'll save me some serious coding time. Before I dive into using it full time though there is something bugging me that I'd like to sort out. In my current database (a SQL2008 db) I have split the tables, views, sps etc. up into separate chunks by schema/owner name, so all the customer tables are in the customer. schema, products in the product. schema etc., so a to select from the customers address table i'd do a select * from customer.address Unfortunately, Subsonic ignores the schema/owner name and just gives me the base table name. This is fine as I've no duplicates between schemas (e.g Customer.Address and Supplier.Address don't both exist) but I just feel the code could be clearer if I could split by schema. Ideally I'd like to be able to alter the namespace by schema/owner - I think this would have least impact on SubSonic yet make the resulting code easier to read. Problem is, I've crawled all over the Subsonic source and don't have a clue how to do this (doesn't help that I code in VB not C# = yes I know, blame the ZX Spectrum!!) If anyone has tackled this before or has an idea on how to solve it, I'd be really grateful, Thanks in advance. Ed

  Read the article

• NTFS 'Owner' missing when accessing hard disk from external USB adapter

  - by trismarck

  I have a hard drive with Windows XP SP3 installed on it. When the drive is connected through the standard SATA connector inside the laptop, everything works as expected. However when I remove the drive from the laptop and connect the drive to the external USB adapter, almost all files / folders lose the 'Owner' field contents. I was wondering why could that be. I've tried two USB adapters and this happens on each. I could take the ownership of all of the files, but this would overwrite the Owner value (the Owner value that is present when the drive is accessed through standard SATA connector in the laptop). //edit: if the hard drive is used through the USB adapter, I can't access most of the files, at least until I take ownership of the files (/folders). This is how it looks like: HDD inside USB adapter: HDD inside laptop: (note the Owner column) //edit: some of the files on the first screenshot have Owner field filled up. That's because I took the ownership of those files / folders to be able to access the files on the hard drive. //edit2: also, if the hard drive is connected through USB adapter and if I've took the ownership of some files by the 'ddd' user, then if i login as a different user (lets say 'eee' user), the owner field is _still_ empty: ddd user: eee user: eee user can't access the 'ddd' folder. Both users have Administrator priviledges.

  Read the article

• PlayStation 3 Owner Gets A $100 Refund For Losing Linux

  <b>Kotaku:</b> "At least one PlayStation 3 owner has found the silver lining in Sony's decision to axe the option to install other operating systems like Linux to the console, obtaining a rather substantial refund from Amazon.com for his PS3 purchase"

  Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >